GoodOwl,

Thanks for the info. I think I had read something to that effect as well (Rice and BCoM were considering merger in the past). By the way, my post wasn't a put-down to Rice. It really just reflects the present day reality that a lot of (federal) research funding is in the health/med science realm and if you don't have that under your umbrella than it can skew the numbers out of your favor a bit. I think it is well know that Rice is a great academic school.


dback,

No doubt that Hispanics watch football. I didn't claim otherwise.

I'm not going to spend my time researching something so obvious (that first gen immigrants generally don't care about American Football). You go waste your own time. Meanwhile, it's safe to conclude that a large chunk of the population growth of the West (and South, for that matter) is from immigration, and so it is somewhat dubious to tout such statistics with regards to the potential growth of an American Football brand.

Unless you want to stay on that topic and feel you have something else to add -- and in a polite, respectful manner please -- instead of trying to personally attack me, then I don't think you need to respond further. Thank you

(08-01-2016 01:39 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  GoodOwl,

Thanks for the info. I think I had read something to that effect as well (Rice and BCoM were considering merger in the past). By the way, my post wasn't a put-down to Rice. It really just reflects the present day reality that a lot of (federal) research funding is in the health/med science realm and if you don't have that under your umbrella than it can skew the numbers out of your favor a bit. I think it is well know that Rice is a great academic school.


dback,

No doubt that Hispanics watch football. I didn't claim otherwise.

I'm not going to spend my time researching something so obvious (that first gen immigrants generally don't care about American Football). You go waste your own time. Meanwhile, it's safe to conclude that a large chunk of the population growth of the West (and South, for that matter) is from immigration, and so it is somewhat dubious to tout such statistics with regards to the potential growth of an American Football brand.

Unless you want to stay on that topic and feel you have something else to add -- and in a polite, respectful manner please -- instead of trying to personally attack me, then I don't think you need to respond further. Thank you

You are the one that spouts unsubstantiated non-sense, then get all butt hurt when you are called out on your BS. You made an idiotic claim, and refuse to back it up.


Since I live here, am married to a first-gen, have relatives who were born in Mexico, see the support the Cardinals, Sun Devils and Wildcats have in the Hispanic community, I think I know a bit more on the subject.


But please, keep making yourself look foolish.

(08-01-2016 11:38 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  dback,

What's the name of the logical fallacy for trying to frame my post to make it sound like it was saying something it wasn't? Yeah, you did that one.

A) I said first gen immigrants, not "anyone of Hispanic descent".
B) You know damn well I wasn't saying 100% don't watch. Nothing is ever 100%. So change it to 99%. Then my point is correct, and your point is also correct.

Practically a dishonest post, if you ask me.



ken,

The post was clearly about research dollars. Your post is therefore a nonsequitor.

Sarcastic yes. Nonsequitor no. Unless your point is that research dollars drive athletic expansion.

"If PAC felt it had to expand to 14 and had to include a Texas team, then it could do Hawaii and Rice or Colorado St and Rice."

Rice and Tulane kind of sit out there as the two schools poking holes into the "academics matter" camp of expansion, simply because they're the most elite schools outside the P5 structure, and geographically add value to at least three or four of the other major conferences. Granted, Tulane was taken by someone who had a spot at the table (though it's the supposed decision to make that conference split), but I think you could throw both of them out there as candidates for anyone from the PAC to the ACC to the Big Ten...

...but that could have been arranged some time ago, yet hasn't.

Where it concerns the PAC, I think those guys out there haven't a clue. I think they pooched it with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, and they may literally be stuck on this "Texas or nobody" gridlock. It doesn't sound like they have a command of their media.

Would they be over-thinking not taking Texas property like Rice if Texas won't be available for a couple of decades? I don't think so, but I'm curious who else they think they can demand. Everyone they want is claimed in the Big XII, so if Texas doesn't budge, likely none of the others will as well. And, really, who else is there? Texas, OU...Kansas? Iowa State?

I think the benefit of picking up Rice is that it would entice Texas to consider having them back on the regular schedule. The two work well together; put another way, Rice is very giving to Texas, and the two seem to pair well. Would Texas be okay with them being equals?